MODULE I

EDUCATIONAL PLANNING CONCEPTS,

THEORIES, MODELS AND PERSPECTIVES

INTRODUCTION

Module I is an introduction to educational planning and management. It surveys planning

and development in the Third World; presents the theories, concepts and rationale of
planning; dissects various planning process models; and presents strategic planning
perspectives. An understanding of strategic planning concepts, theories, process models
and perspectives, and rationale is a good preparation for strategic plan crafting.

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

At the end of this module, you should be able to:

1. Describe the beginnings of educational planning;
2. Discuss planning theories, concepts and rationale;
3. Explain the various planning process models; and
4. Describe the different planning perspectives.

LESSON 1
PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT
IN THE THIRD WORLD

THE FIRST DEVELOPMENT DECADE

After the Second World War, the United States together with other developed countries
started a foreign aid program. The initiative, which began as a program for
reconstruction, became economic and technical assistance in such areas as health,
education and agriculture. Then it expanded to include public administration and
management.

For more than a decade, university professors and private business consultants provided
socio-economic programs and technical assistance in public administration and
management to governments and universities in Asia, Latin America, and Africa. Western
academicians and consultants exported to the recipient countries various administrative
and financial processes and technologies, which were very important in fostering
development in the Third World. This was based on the perception that recipient
countries generally lacked the administrative capability for planning and implementing
plans. To remedy the situation, administrative technologies were transferred to improve
the machinery of the national governments of developing countries.

1
This intervention resulted to the adoption of development planning as a cornerstone in the
pursuit of economic development in recipient countries.

Educational Planning in the Third World

Developed countries formally introduced educational planning in Third World countries

in the late 1950s and early 1960s. The objectives of educational plans, which were
integrated in national development plans, of Third World countries focused on overseeing
the expansion of educational systems. Great hopes were placed in educational planning
for it served as a foundation in setting objectives, goals and priorities, implementing
educational policies, and maximizing the use of limited resources.

Singh (1990) enumerates the significant impact of educational planning in Third World
countries during the late 1960s as follows: (a) the growth and development of educational
systems; (b) development of educational administration and the setting up of planning
organizations within the educational system; and (c) enhanced perception on the problem
of efficiency in the educational system.

The Paris Conference on Policies for Educational Growth in the early parts of the 70s
reviewed the nature and consequences of educational growth, dissected current problems,
and came up with planning guidelines and policies. However, the proposed policies were
not implemented because of the research results that highlighted the inadequacy of inputs
in producing the desired educational outputs. Educational planning, therefore, veered
toward the adoption of policies aimed at attaining effective educational outcomes
concerning the learner given his socio-economic status and other resources.

The economic crises in the 1970s and 1980s brought about by the uncontrolled rise in the
price of oil drastically changed the setting in which educational institutions in Third
World countries operated. Many developing countries implemented major cuts in public
expenditures which limited resources for education. Educational planning faced a new
challenge in the 1990s that of developing a paradigm or approach of harmonizing the
loose linkage between greatly reduced budget and the goal for quality education (Ross
and Mahlch, 1990).

While Third World countries benefited immensely from educational planning from the
1960s to the 1990s, their educational systems also faced problems. Among these
problems were: (a) excessive quantitative orientation, that is, planning approach had been
predominantly quantitative both in analysis and normative aspects; (b) educational
planning had been overly centralized in the decision-making process; (c) weakness in
implementation; and (d) insufficiency of the evaluation dimension of educational
planning (Singh, 1990).

As a field of study, educational planning managed to grow and progress even while it was
initially an integral part of national development planning. Attracting a sizeable number

2
of followers and adherents, educational planning developed as a separate field of
specialization in educational management.

Planning in Higher Education in the Philippines

Educational planning in the Philippines is as old as its educational system. Educational

surveys and studies were made to provide a basis for the restructuring of Philippine
education. The more important ones were the Monroe Survey in 1925, the United Nations
Economic and Social Commission (UNESCO) Mission in 1949, the joint Congressional
Committee of Education Survey of 1949, the Swanson Survey in 1960, the Presidential
Commission to Survey Philippine Education (PCSPE) in 1970, and the Congressional
Committee on Education (EDCOM).

Interestingly, a significant point in the findings of the above surveys is the observation of
the PCSPE that Philippine education was weak in educational planning. This observation
is supported by several factors, namely: (a) the lack of a clear definition of the role of
education in national development; (b) the absence of long-range goal setting
performance targets for each operational component of the educational system; (c) the
absence of policy guidelines that define the proper function of each educational level or
sector; (d) the nature of decision making process of both individuals and educational
institutions that is based on forced choice rather than guided selection; and (e) the
disproportionate magnitude of educational responsibility relative to the capacity of the
economy to support the corresponding requirements for educational service (Miclat,
2005).

Advent of Educational Planning

The promulgation of Presidential Decree No. 6-A, popularly known as the Educational
Development Decree of 1992, gave emphasis to educational planning in education. The
Decree provided for a broad general education that will assist each individual to
respond effectively to changing needs and conditions of the nation through a system of
educational planning and evaluation. The Integrated Reorganization Plan of 1972 put
this into action by providing an office for Planning Service in the reorganized structure of
the then Department of Education and Culture.

The three decades that followed had been problematic for tertiary education in the
country. State-run universities and colleges had mushroomed from 23 in 1972 and 78 in
1984. Today, there are now more than 100 tax-funded colleges and universities in the
Philippines. As a consequence of this proliferation of SUCs, the budget for education
significantly increased from 1978 to 1990 resulting to the ballooning of the budget.
Eventually, the budget of many SUCs had to be cut due to reduced public budget and
increased debt burden.

The issuance of Letter of Instruction No. 1461 on May 23, 1985 provided the necessary
impetus for planning among SUCs. The LOI required SUCs to formulate long-term

3
development plans including a physical development plan that support the manpower
goals of the region where the SUCs are located and of the entire country. Moreover, each
university or college is mandated to identify a field of specialization that is defined in its
charter, its capability to implement well taking into account its available resources, and
the educational opportunities in other SUCs and private education institutions in the area.
Answering the call, the Department of Education, Culture and Sports (DECS), forerunner
of the Department of Education (DepEd), organized two training programs on
institutional development planning in collaboration with the Development Academy of
the Philippines and the Philippine Association of State Colleges and Universities.

The Congressional Commission on Education (EDCOM) study of 1992 found that the
quality of Philippine education was declining continuously. As a result, the EDCOM
recommended the restructuring of the Department of Education, Culture and Sports into
three agencies, namely: the Commission on Higher Education, which oversees tertiary
education, the Technical Education and Skills Development Authority, which is
responsible for short-term manpower skills training, and the Department of Education,
Culture and Sports, which was renamed as the Department of Education (DepEd), which
will take charge of kindergarten, elementary, and secondary education.

The Commission on Higher Education came up with its first Long-Term Higher
Education Development Plan (1996-2005). The plan served as the blueprint of change,
reform and innovation in higher education. Subsequently, the Commission required all
SUCs and CHED-supervised higher education institutions in the country to formulate and
submit their respective ten-year development plan. In the private sector, the preparation
of a long-term plan is a requirement for the grant of permit to operate a college or
university.

LESSON 2
PLANNING THEORIES, CONCEPTS, AND RATIONALE

PLANNING THEORIES

The last five decades following the 1960s saw the unprecedented growth of planning in
both the developed and Third World countries. Planning has become an ubiquitous
activity engaged in by organizations and individuals everywhere.

There are four major planning theories. These are: (a) philosophical synthesis; (b)
rationalism; (c) organizational development; and (d) empiricism (Miclat, 2005 citing
Adams, 1991).

Philosophical Synthesis
This theory emphasizes a holistic approach to planning which includes information on
social, economic, political, cultural and ethical conditions as well as the environmental
background of the institution or organization for which planning will be undertaken.

4
Rationalism

Rationalism looks at people as a utility. Rational planning models follow a sequential,

observable cycle that includes setting of goals, determining objectives, preparing plans,
implementing the plans, and reviewing or evaluating results.

Organizational development

A planning approach that focuses primarily on ways to achieve organizational change.

The organizational development approach includes a human relations approach to
innovation and change in management style, employee satisfaction, decision-making
processes, and the general health of the organization.

Empiricism

Empiricism is a planning theory that acknowledges the importance of studies on system

behavior by social scientists concerned with planning theory. Empiricism is less
normative, less concerned with planned social change, and uses a positivistic analytical
framework.

PLANNING CONCEPTS

Planning

The concept of planning emerged out of the development efforts and experiences of Third
World countries when they adopted planning as the major instrument in the pursuit of
their economic and social development. Development planning is principally an act of
deciding ahead of time the what, the how, the when, and the who of identifying and
determining development goals, policies and plans; and serious setting of alternative
courses of action, procedures and strategies needed to achieve the purposes of
government institutions (NEDA, 1985). In the crafting of development plans, socio-
economic and political development programs are treated separately but are integrated
within the purview of national aspirations, policies and goals.

Strategic Planning

Strategic planning is also viewed as focusing in on decision-making, information, and the

future. Its very essence or substance is concentrated on the consideration of current
decision options based on available data and taken in the light of their possible effects
and consequences over a period of time. In other words, strategic planning is concerned
with identifying foreseeable thrusts and weaknesses to avoid and strengths and
opportunities to pursue. Strategic planning is the effective application of the best
alternative information to decisions that have to be made to ensure a secure future (Day,
1997).

5
From the point of view of education, strategic planning is considered as a set of
purposeful actions that influence an organization in order to effect change. It is also
regarded as a methodology aimed at future change of a present situation. It is viewed as
long-term planning in order to achieve a desired vision for an organization or school. It
defines the whats to be achieved (Herman and Herman, 1994).

It is generally agreed by experts that an acceptable definition of planning should embody

the following features, namely: (a) an external orientation; (b) a holistic systematic
approach; (c) a process for formulating plans, objectives, strategies and programs; (d) use
of systematic methods in the analysis of strategic situation and alternatives; (e) a
commitment to action; and (f) a knowledge of results (Miclat, 2005).

STRATEGIC PLANNING RATIONALE

Organizations need to plan far various reasons, namely:

To reorient the organization or institution to the needs of the community.

Community includes the mega community (e.g. the Philippine, Ugandan or
Bahraini society), the macro community (the educational system), and the
micro community, which is the private or the public sector education system.
The necessity of reorienting the institution to the needs of the community has
been underscored by Onuskin (1993) when he commented that In the
majority of the institutions there is a serious gap between their activities
and the actual societal and economic needs of their countries.

Another serious consideration is that when people plan for expansion, a

certain level of minimum standard must be observed. This will guarantee a
certain level of minimum quality performance. In a higher education
institution, such standard must cover the physical plant, facilities, and faculty
and staff. More significantly, it should include student qualification and
performance, curriculum, methodology, evaluation procedures and financing
arrangements. This standard can be achieved through surveys, studies,
operations research, and cost-benefit analysis.

Effective strategic planning initiatives or efforts can make the organization a

more responsive and viable instrument for socio-economic development of the
nation. In the Philippines, the strategic development plans formulated and
developed by the National Economic and Development Authority for the
government becomes the major guideposts in identifying and determining
priorities in every sector. For example, for the period 1993-1998 the program
of the national government is concentrated on the improvement of the quality
of life of the people. In the education sector, the primary objective is the
delivery of quality education in all levels. Total human development and
world competitiveness are the main strategies adopted to attain this objective.

6
 There is a need to establish priorities because of dwindling resources for
sectoral services. As could be inferred from the National and Regional
Development Plans and Annual Investment Programs, there are many
competing concerns which need government attention and support. There is
therefore a need to prioritize programs and projects. Priority listing can be
achieved by formulating a set of quantified criteria reached through
consensus. Programs and projects can then be prioritized thereby assuring the
rational allocation of scarce resources.

While the knowledge explosion and the emergence of new technologies

brought about by advances in science and information and communication
technology blur our vision and make us less able to visualize the future, the
nullifying effect of the inundation of new knowledge and technology for
efforts in strategic planning underscores the need for planning.

Strategic planning means a more realistic forecasting of events. Strategic

planning always involves some view of the future.

LESSON 3
PLANING PROCESS MODELS

PLANNING MODELS

A model is defined as a set of variables classified as endogenous and exogenous cause-

effect relationships among these variables and the consistency of these relations. It
attempts to explain the phenomenon characterized by the endogenous and exogenous
variables. A phenomenon is explained when a model of its endogenous variables can be
determined, given those of the exogenous variables (Miclat, 2005).

Hudson (1979) is the first scholar to develop a typology of planning models. Some of his
models were, however, adopted and enriched from earlier works of other scholars. His
planning typology consists of the a) synoptic model, b) incremental model, c) transactive
model, d) advocacy model, and e) radical model.

The synoptic model, which is pretty much identical to the rational model, includes four
components, namely: goal setting, identification of alternatives, evaluation of means
against ends, and implementation of decisions. In the incremental model, planning is
constrained by available means than by the definition of goals. Any planned change
consists of small or minimal adjustments from the past. The transactive model gives
emphasize on interaction and interpersonal discussion and the process of mutual learning
and understanding in planning. The fourth, advocacy model, underlines the
confrontational features of decision-making. The radical model consists of two editions,
one in which spontaneous activism is guided by self-reliance and mutual help, and the

7
other, concentrates on organizational characteristics that inhibit the equitable distribution
of goods and services.

Another scholar who came up with models of planning is Wilson (1989). Like Hudson,
he also developed five planning typologies. He introduced three alternative models in
addition to the rational and incremental models, namely mixed scanning, learning
adaptive, and general systems models. The mixed scanning model is more realistic than
the rational model and less passive than the incremental model. The learning adaptive
model treats planning as a process of social learning built on individual psychosocial
development that is best attained in small, non-hierarchical groups. The general systems
model attempts to use the idea of a system as a unifying scientific paradigm. The
planning typologies developed by Hudson and Wilson, as well as other theorists, were
grouped and classified into two by Adams (1991), rational and interactive.

PLANNING PROCESS MODELS

A process is defined as the series of steps followed in doing an activity. These steps can
be illustrated in graphical or symbolic terms atypical of a model. A planning process
model supplies guidance in what ought to be done in practice. It also dictates explicitly
what people ought to do in order for them to act accordingly and behave rationally so as
to ascertain the successful completion of the process of activities (Miclat, 2005).

In economics and public administration, strategic planning is perceived as development

planning. In this view, development planning is the process of determining in advance the
best possible way of achieving stated and defined development objectives within given
period at the least cost. The model, as presented in Figure 1, has six major steps. These
are: a) goal-setting; b) situational information; c) policy/strategy formulation; d)
plans/programs/projects; e) implementation; and f) evaluation (NEDA, 1993).

Figure 1. NEDA (1993) Development Planning Model

8
 The model was later refined where the major steps were expanded into eight represented
by circles arranged from left to right. The model, as shown in Figure 2, involves the
following steps: 1) Situational analysis, 2) Goal/objective/ target setting, 3)
Policy/strategy formulation, 4) Program/project identification, 5) Investment
programming, 6) Budgeting, 7) Implementation and monitoring and 8) Evaluation and
plan update (NEDA, 1993).

Goals Program/ Implemen- Evaluation

Situation Policies Project Investment
Objectives Programming Budgeting tation and and
Analysis Strategies Identification
Targets Monitoring Plan Update

Project
Preparation

Studies Planning Programming Budgeting Implementation Evaluation

Researches

Figure 2. NEDA (2001) Development Planning Process Model

The line segments below the figure refer to the managerial functions and activities that
are undertaken for each step in the model. The first step in the model is the situational
analysis which requires the conduct of survey and research studies. The survey calls for
the gathering of socio-cultural, demographic, economic, physical and natural data, and
information in the environment. A survey of the organization has to be undertaken
indicating past and present performances, programs and projects, manpower resources,
budget, and infrastructures and equipment. The data are then analyzed and projected in
order to identify concerns, issues and parameters, constraints and problems, and resources
and opportunities which are used as inputs in planning. The outputs of these activities are
the organizational profile and socio-economic profile of the community. The next step is
the setting of goals, objectives and targets. A goal is a broad statement of an image of the
future the organization seeks to achieve.

The objective, which grows from the goal, refers to medium-range expectation which is
pursued to satisfy the goal. The target evolves from the objective. It is the most specific
statement of purpose which is simple, measurable, time bound and achievable. Once the
goals, objectives and targets are crafted, more specific policy statements and strategies
are framed for each of the areas of concern, e.g. social, economic, physical, political and

9
administration. The integration of these to a framework plan for a particular period,
serves as a guide to the organization. Programs and projects are identified in order to
effectively channel resources to development programs and projects considered strategic
in the overall attainment of goals. Prioritization of programs and projects is determined
done through the conduct of feasibility studies (Miclat, 2005).

Budgeting is the costing of priority programs and projects. Implementation is actual

carrying out of funded programs and projects by concerned offices and individuals of the
organization. Programs and projects are monitored to find out if they are implemented
according to plan. Otherwise, corrective measures should be readily instituted to put back
the project on track. Results, in terms of outputs, after a year of implementation, and
outcomes after about four to five years of implementation, in terms of effects and
impacts, are evaluated. These outputs and outcomes discussed with managers and
planners for decision-making and updating the plan (Ibid, 32).

EDUCATIONAL PLANNING MODELS

Bells Strategic Planning Model

There are strategic planning models that apply to education. One of these models is that
one developed by the Northwest Regional Education Laboratory in cooperation with the
Oregon Education Coordinating Council. The purpose of the model is to increase both
intra-system and inter-system planning effectiveness. The circular model (Figure 3) has
eight major steps grouped into three phases and steps.

The model separates the three phases of management activity as strategic planning,
tactical planning, and control. The processes under strategic planning are identification of
problems, definition of policy objectives, and assignment of institutional roles and
resources.

Tactical planning transforms policy objectives and general allocation of resources into
selection of programs, identification of alternative strategies, and developing specific
program designs for action. Action ensures that performance proceeds according to plans,
as well as monitors and evaluates results. In the center of this circular model is the
information system that takes care of all data and information gathered and used as
feedback in decision-making and planning process (Bell et al., 1989).

10
 INFORMATIO
N SYSTEM

Figure 3. Strategic Planning Model (Bell et al., 1989).

Hermans Strategic Planning Model

Herman and Herman (1994) developed a model that focuses on a school as the frame of
planning reference (Figure 4). The steps are grouped into two major areas, namely,
strategic planning and tactical planning. The planning areas and steps are:

A. Strategic Planning
1. Vision # 1
2. a. Beliefs and values
b. Environmental scanning; Internal and External
c. Critical success factors
3. Vision # 2
4. Mission statement
5. Strategic goals
6. SWOT analysis

B. Tactical Planning
7. Strategic objectives
8. Decision rules and priority selection
9. Action plans

11
 10. Allocate resources and operate plans
Vision # 1

Critical
Beliefs and External External Success
Values Scanning Scanning Factors

Vision # 2 S
M Needs Assessment W
i What is? What should be? O
s T
s
i A
o Strategic Goals n
n a
l
y
Strategic Objectives s
i
s

Decision Rules
Achievable Priority
Affordable Selection
Meaningful
80% Success

Develop Action Plans

- Brainstorming
- Force Field Analysis
- Cost Benefit
- Select Best Alternative

Allocate Resources
and
Operate Plans

Figure 4. Strategic Planning Model (Herman and Herman, 1994)

12
Under this model, the first step under strategic planning is the creation and consensus of a
vision by school leaders and stakeholders of what should be for the school. The role of
the school is considered in the mega, macro and micro environments. With the
information, the planners are able to situate where they are and core values and beliefs of
school leaders and stakeholders are identified for eventual incorporation into the vision.
Scanning the environment, internally and externally, is the next step. Generated data and
information would provide the present state of the school and obtaining conditions , the
environment would dictate which are facilitative and impediments in the attainment of the
preferred ideal vision.

The next concern is the identification of critical success factors. These factors are jointly
identified by the school leaders and stakeholders and eventually retain only those that
enhance the attainment of the desired future vision, while those that hinder are
eliminated. With so much data and information, vision number two is arrived at and
agreed upon finally by the planners. The final vision is then used as basis in the
formulation of the mission statement and the strategic goal. Formulated mission and goal
consider the major role of the school in the mega, macro, and micro environments.

The final step under this phase is the conduct of the SWOT analysis. Data gathered
earlier are laid out in two-by-two table to analytically determine which of these factors
enhance or impede the attainment of the preferred ideal vision. Strengths and
opportunities are further built upon and capitalized on while weaknesses and threats and
remedied and eliminated. Once the strategic plan is completed, this is turned over to the
tactical planners who will devise and design the specific operational plans (Miclat, 2005).

In the tactical planning phase, the first step is the formulation of specific objectives for
every goal that has-been framed. Prioritization of these-objectives is undertaken with the
use of a commonly-agreed upon set of decision rules. Once the objectives are prioritized,
the next step is the development of specific action plans. The plans are then subjected to
testing or analysis to determine the best alternative strategies. The testing involves the use
of brainstorming, force field analysis, cost-benefit, and cost-effectiveness analyses. The
last step is the allocation of resources to the best alternative plans and strategies,
implementing and monitoring them, and finally evaluating the results (Ibid).

Kaufmans Strategic Planning Model

Another strategic planning model applicable to education is the systems framework

model (Kaufman et al., 2002). The model (Figure 5) has undergone extensive
improvements during the last two decades. The strategic planning processes were initially
presented in a systems analysis of six steps (Kaufman, 1972); the Organization Elements
Model (OEM) (Kaufman, 1988); a systems framework of four major clusters of 13 steps
(Kaufman and Herman, 1991); and finally an improved systems framework model
consisting of three major clusters and 12 steps, as follows:

13
 A. Scoping

1. Ideal vision
2. Identify and select needs
3. Define current mission
4. Derive mission objective

B. Planning

5. Identify SWOT
6. Derive long and short-term mission
7. Derive strategic plan

C. Implementation and Continuous Improvement

8. Derive tactical and operational plans

9. Make/buy/obtain resources
10. Implement
11. Continuous improvement/formative evaluation
12. Determine effectiveness and efficiency
Revise/improve as required

The model begins with the scoping phase. The first step under this phase is the
identification of the preferred ideal vision in the mega, macro, and micro perspectives.
Parallel to this activity is the identification and selection of needs. This step involves the
identification of values and beliefs and data gathering on the internal organization and
external environment. These are inputted in the continuous improvement of formulating
the ideal vision. From the data, critical success factors are also determined to guide
educational partners in the planning and thinking processes of the strategic planning
phase. The framed ideal vision dictates the elements of the mission of the organization
which commits to deliver and contribute to that vision. A mission is a broad description
of purpose. Once the mission is framed, the objectives are formulated. Objectives should
be based on the mission and the mission on the vision. The objectives state both where
the organization is headed and the precise criteria for determining accomplishments
(Miclat, p. 48).

The conduct of SWOT analysis is the first step under the planning phase. On the bases of
the ideal vision, mission, objectives and needs assessment, the analysis of identified
strengths, weaknesses, threats, and opportunities becomes the organizational barometer

14
indicating the organizational and environmental factors that enhance or impede the
attainment of specific objectives. Based on this information, long- and short-term
missions (targets) are derived and the strategic plan developed through the conduct of
function and system analyses. The results of these analyses are in the form of products
designed to attain the objectives. Scoping and planning phases fall under the domain of
strategic planning. Once the strategic plans are completed, these are turned over to the
tactical planners (Ibid.).

The first step under tactical planning is the formulation of tactical and operational plans
through the operation of a method-means analysis. The analysis identifies the possible
ways and means for doing and undertaking the products, tasks or outputs. Once the
products and the different means for doing them are completed, funds and resources are
allocated. Tasks and products are then implemented. The ascertainment of successful plan
implementation requires developing of structures within the organization, installing a
management information system (MIS), and a monitoring system. After a short period of
time, formative evaluation is undertaken to determine whether or not outputs
approximated the stated objectives and mission. The conduct of summative evaluation
determines the levels of efficiency and effectiveness of the outputs maturing into
outcomes. Outputs and outcomes serve as inputs to revise if not improve the strategic and
tactical planning process (Ibid., p.48).

The model as presented in Figure 6 consists of nine major steps:

1. Preparation
a. Organization and staffing
b. Training

2. Environmental scanning
a. External environment
b. Internal organization
c. SWOT analysis
d. Strategic planning framework

3. Vision, mission, goal, objective and target setting

4. Policy/strategy formulation
5. Program/project identification
6. Investment programming
7. Budgeting
8. Implementation and monitoring
9. Evaluation and plan update

15
 MICRO
MACRO
MEGA
Ideal
Vision

Identify and Define Current

Select Needs Mission

Derive Mission
Objective
SCOPING

Identify
SWOT

Derive Long and

Short-Term
Missions

Derive Strategic
Plans
PLANNING
IMPLEMENTATION
AND CONTINUOUS Derive Tactical
IMPROVEMENT and Operational
Plans

Make/But/Obtain
Revise/Improve
Resources
As Required

Continuous Improve-
Implement ment Formative
Evaluation

Determine
Effectiveness/
Efficiency

Figure 5. Strategic Planning Model (Kaufman et al., 2002)

16
 OUTCOME

Effect
Impact

Evaluation OUTPUT
Plan
Update

Organization
and Implementation PROCESS
Staffing

Policy Program/
Environment Vision Strategy Project Investment Budgeting
Scanning Formulation Identification Programming

Training
MISSION Project INPUT
Preparation

INTERNAL
GOALS

EXTERNAL
OBJECTIVES

S.W.O.T.
TARGETS
Figure 6. Strategic Planning Process Model (Miclat, 2005).
FRAMEWORK

17
 LESSON 4
PERSPECTIVES IN STRATEGIC PLANNING

If planners really aspire to formulate a realistic, achievable, responsive and effective

strategic plan and to implement the plan, they have to possess down-board thinking,
paradigm shift, and holistic and global orientation.

DOWN-BOARD THINKING

Down-board thinking is an important component of effective strategic planning. Like a

chess grandmaster, a planner should think and decide not only on immediate things but he
must look down-board and consider the future. Effective strategic planning creates
scenarios and considers the consequences of these scenarios in the light of competition
and the response of the environmental factors (Goodstein et al., 1993). This suits well
Peter Druckers recommendation that if we cannot predict the future, we might as well
create it.

PARADIGM SHIFT

In order to be able to craft a realistic, responsive, effective and achievable strategic plan,
planners need a shift in paradigm. Paradigm is simply a set of ideas that are usually
unwritten and that people have learned and embraced through education and experiences
that defines the conventional methods about the rules of nature and life (Cali, 1993).

A paradigm acts as a mental filter or screen that delimits the way people think about
things by setting up boundary conditions that are often perceived rather than real.
Paradigm shift requires disassemblying our old and conventional ways of seeing, doing,
thinking and assessing a thing because they no longer apply with reality and the present.
The new paradigm calls for a broad, flexible, eclectic, creative and futuristic mental
framework (Miclat, 2005).

We must now change and enlarge our educational paradigm from teaching to learning,
from rote mastery to process learning and dynamic citizenship, from input-oriented to
output-oriented curriculum development. We have to be radical, if needed, and future
shock-free to ascertain the success of our products and graduates both in school and in
the real world of life.

PLANNING ORIENTATION

There are three types of orientation in strategic planning, namely: systems, mega-level,
and outside-in.

Systems Approach

A system is an organized whole composed of two or more interdependent parts or

subsystems and delineated by identifiable boundaries from its environmental suprasystem

18
(Kast and Rosenzweig, 1990). The elements of a systems are inputs, conversion process,
outputs, and outcomes. Miclat (1998) presents a system framework and its major
elements in the context of a university in Figure 7.

The inputs are demands, mandate, and resources in the form of manpower, funds,
materials, equipment, and facilities. The conversion processes consists of teaching-
learning process both formal and informal, co-curricular activities in and out of the
institution, short-term training interventions, and implementation of research and
economic development projects.

The outputs in quantitative terms are number of graduates and trainees, number of
researches completed, number of mature technologies developed, and amount of funds
generated and sourced. In qualitative terms, the outputs are manifest competence of
graduates and trainees, number of researches published, number of mature technologies
commercialized and income generated.

Outcome is divided into effect and impact. Effect is the immediate consequences of
program outputs (Mathur and Inayatullah, 1998), like licensure board examination
performance, number of employed graduates and trainees, international and national
research awards garnered, and mature technologies adopted.

On the other hand, impact is change in the standard of living of the target/partner groups
or within the target area emanating from the program (Ibid.). A period of four years or
more is necessary for the effect to gestate into an impact. The impacts are self-reliance,
self-sufficiency, social responsibility, economic independence and political dynamism,
and better quality of life.

The use of systems approach to strategic planning will provide the managers and planners
a holistic and integrated view which can expand into a global perspective should the
university attain some degree of regional and international recognition.

19
 INPUTS CONVERSION PROCESS OUTPUTS OUTCOMES
Effects/Impact

Demands Quantitative
Mandate Teaching-learning number of Board exams
Resources Co-curri activities graduates, Employed graduates/
Manpower Research execution trainees and trainees
Funds Training programs research Research awards
Materials Tech application Qualitative manifest Self-reliance
Physical Innovative management competence Self-sufficiency
Others systems researches Citizenship
Physical plan published Better quality of life
implementation technologies
commercialized

Internal Organization Feedback

External Environment

Figure 7. A Systems Planning Framework of a University (Miclat, Jr., 1998)

Mega-Level Environment

There are three planning levels: mega-level, macro-level and micro-level. Kaufman, et al
(2002) equated mega-level to the society, macro-level to the educational system, and the
micro-level to the individual learner, teacher or group. They contend that mega-level
planning views the society and the clients as the basis for everything the education
system uses, does, and delivers. In the macro-level, planning is primarily concerned with
the organization but without any substantial commitment to both client and society. In
micro-level, planning is concerned only with individual or group jobs and tasks.

Miclat (2005) adopted a different perspective in the use of mega, macro, and micro
concepts. His planning reference is the organization like a university and looks on its role
in a different level of planning environment. The levels of planning environment vary
depending on the highest level of planning environment one adopts. But all three are used
in one planning activity. For example, if society is the highest level of planning
environment, then mega is used for society, macro for the region and micro for the
province, city or town. In a higher level of planning environment, say the world, the
result would be: mega-global, macro-Philippine society, and micro-region say the Central
Luzon. Lowering from the level of environment, the pairings will be: mega-region,
macro-province, and micro-district or town.

If the society as a whole is chosen as the mega level of planning environment, the
question is: What is it that society needs that the university will produce and deliver that
gives the greatest payoffs to society? At the macro level, the question shall be: What is

20
it that the university produces or delivers that the region needs? For the micro level, the
question is: What does the university needs to produce or deliver what the province
needs? In this context, a university is viewed as an organization that has a specific
environment. It has to respond to that environment to maintain a dynamic state. A
university is an instrument of the State and of society human resource development in
terms of producing highly educated professionals and skilled manpower. This manpower
becomes a contributing citizen of society especially in the place where he resides (Ibid.).

Outside-In Planning

If one plans for society as the mega-level of planning environment, then an alternative
perspective an enlarged perspective is gained. Kaufman and associates (2002) claim
that planning in this way is as if one were looking into the organization from the outside
from the vantage point of society back into the organization and its results and efforts.

Outside-in planning is proactive. It is a frame of reference that continuously challenges

the status quo while identifying possible scenarios and new opportunities that bring about
positive change and growth to society.

Activity

What similarities and/or differences, if any, did you observe among the 3 educational
planning models discussed in this module? Of these planning models, which one would
best answer the need for strategic planning in your school? Explain.

Suggested Time Frame: Two Weeks

21